About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6
for tax increases every other day, every day for that matter, and those are mott going to deal with -- not going to deal with the spiraling out-of-control spending that rawses the need for more debt -- raises the need for more debt. again, the differences on this subject, mr. speaker, are well-known, and i'm hopeful that we can work towards setting aside the differences, focusing in on how far we can rk towards accomplishing cc dealing with the problem of the mounting unfunded liabilities of the federal government. i yield back. . ha the gentleman for his observation. let me, if i can, some irony in the gentleman's response. we've been talking about two items. one, the going to conference, i eal with prospective spending, prospective increase in debt or deficit because we buy more or spend more or cut revenues more. the debt limit, as the gentleman so well knows, deals with what we've already done. doesn't have anything to do with increasing what we're going to spend. the budget does that. now, we're not dealing with the budget, but there is discussion dealing with this priorit
, because if i owe $2,000 to you guys on my income taxes, do you guys say you can pay off a little at a time and then pay the rest of over a long time without being penalized? that is garbage. host: congress man? guest: there's a provision, if i'm not mistaken, if there are back taxes due, the people beyond $2,000 that is the feet that is being required in order to help pay for the processing of individuals, that will also be demanded as well. two-sided sort. -- sword. many of these undocumented workers in various industries in this country pay into a great deal of federal taxes, whether it is deducted for their payroll for social security, fica, etc., with no opportunity of ever retrieving or utilizing that tax, because they are prohibited from taking any federal program. also, one of the areas in which there will be some consternation is the fact that even though they have a work visa and are working toward a permanent status, all public benefits will be denied to 11 million people that qualify for this program. host: on twitter -- guest: yes, and parts of the criteria is going to be exact
by 50% in five years, but our tax revenue remained the same. hadmember one time we arrested somebody for selling cocaine on a playground. the person arrested was in the country illegally. it took our detectives five hours to determine who he was a trick he had five social security cards. illegal immigration does not only affect people on the southern border. 40% of the people in the country illegally did not cross the border. they came on a visa, the visa expires, and they do not go home. it is nearly impossible for law enforcement to determine who they are talking to it, to determine someone's past. for a minimal amount of money, you can get an entire new identity. we have an immigration law tw reasons. one, to protect our national security, and, too, to protect american jobs. the proposal of the senate gang of eight violates both of those principles. it will make our borders less secure, and jobs harder to find at a time when 22 million americans cannot find work. by offering a pathway to citizenship, by offering amnesty, or what i like to college, temporary amnesty in definitely,
to have the same enthusiasm for paying taxes for the education of its college students today than it had during the cold war. >> anybody else? back in the red shirt in the middle here. >> one of the kingpins of hollywood, more behind the seasons, was lou wasserman who seemed to helped his forces to some political efforts. what was his leanings? was he considered to be a lefty, righty, or just a pragmatist. >> the question is about lou wasserman and his political lengs. -- political leanings. richard? >> lou was seniorman was essentially a man defeated to the welfare of universal pictures. that's what he did and how he defined himself. it seems to me that wasserman was in a certain sense value neutral so long as whatever was happening worked to the benefit of his studio and his enterprise, and it was a vast enterprise by the time it was -- it reached full maturity. i don't think he was -- i don't think he was evil man. he was just a guy really tending to business in a very, very, i must say, very effective way. there's no question in my mind at least, that he was the weeding ontrip -- the
in terms of cutting spending. cutting spending in the tax code. then i think it also keeps promises to people, it to those that were part of their whole life and want nothing more than a secure retirement. and our veterans to whom we have made promises as the have donned the uniform and fought for the country. host: what about the issue of chain cpi? guest: i start with the very basic notion that social security has not contributed one penny to the current deficit or debt. table in not be on the this part of discussion. similarly, to be concerned about the long-term solvency of so-so security. urity.ial sec retirement security is a real question mark for many americans. let's look at the real contributors to our deficit and debt as we try to tackle those challenges. and host: two final questions before we go to calls. this is another article from the hill. why were you left off the list of the 12 senators that went to dinner? iest: i have no idea, but have been very pleased with the president's increase -- increase out reach to the senate and a house. that dialogue is essential to m
possessed in this country? and who would pay for it? would gun owners be subject to still more fees or taxes for exercising their second amendment rights? who would have access to the so-called registry? would the public know who owns guns and who does not? who would ensure that this sensitive information is protected and not used for political purposes, and how? we do not know the answers to these questions, but we do know that such restrictions will not prevent the next tragedy. we should not start down this dangerous road. what should we do instead? i have a few suggestions. instead of undermining the second amendment, mr. president, congress should focus its attention on three areas. first, i believe that robust prosecution of violent criminals is the best deterrent for violent crime. prosecutors should punish to the fullest extent of the law individuals who misuse guns, knives or anything else to commit violent crimes. there should be no leniency, mr. president, what ever for the commission of such crimes. secondly, we should examine and address any deficiencies -- and we have them -- i
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)